Globe editorial: Three things Canada must do to help Ukraine, and Ukrainians [immigration section]

The Globe, long an advocate for increased immigration and supporter of the Century Initiative and Business Council of Canada and other advocates, becomes realistic in noting that large scale increases in Ukrainian temporary and permanent immigration should be within the current high levels, not additional to them:

Immigration: Unless by some miracle the war ends soon, a flood of refugees is coming. As of Thursday morning, the United Nations estimated that a million Ukrainians had left the country. The UN says as many as four million may leave – though if this war is anywhere near as destructive as in Chechnya or Syria, that is likely to be an underestimate.

In response, Canada must be generous and smart.

The Trudeau government said on Thursday that it will create a new visa category, allowing an unlimited number of Ukrainians to come to Canada to live, work or study for a period of up to two years. The government said it will also create an expedited immigration process for Ukrainians fleeing the country, and who have family in Canada.

Some have urged the government to simply drop the visa requirement and allow anyone from Ukraine to buy a plane ticket to Canada, no questions asked. That would be a mistake. The government says it worries about nefarious actors, including people who fought in pro-Russian militias, taking advantage of a zero-security approach. It’s right to worry.

Canada only allows visa-free travel for people from a limited number of countries where the risk of a vacationer choosing to overstay is low. But this program is not about Ukrainians holidaying in Canada – obviously not. It is about allowing people who are basically refugees to come to Canada for two years, after which, depending on the situation back home, many will surely apply to become refugee claimants or immigrants.

Canada always vets people before allowing them to relocate, temporarily or permanently, from overseas. There’s no reason to abandon that approach here.

In terms of immigration and refugee application made directly from Europe, Canada can and should welcome a large number of Ukrainians in the months to come. It’s a chance to make some lemonade, for Canada and Ukrainians, out of this lemon of a situation. However, given Canada’s housing crisis, and already high immigration levels, a big jump in immigrants from Ukraine should be counterbalanced by a temporary lowering of arrivals from other sources.

Canada should also do everything it can to entice the most educated and skilled Ukrainian exiles to choose our country. That would be good for us, and for them. More on all of this, next week.

Source: Globe editorial: Three things Canada must do to help Ukraine, and Ukrainians [immigration section]

Nicolas: Le choix des mots

Another good column on the differences on how groups are portrayed differently, particularly Ukrainian compared to other refugees:

L’invasion de l’Ukraine par la Russie n’a débuté qu’il y a une semaine. L’issue de la situation demeure incertaine. Toutefois, il apparaît déjà clair qu’il s’agit d’un conflit pas comme les autres, et surtout d’un conflit dont on ne parle pas comme les autres.

D’abord, on assiste à un mouvement de solidarité quasi unanime envers le peuple ukrainien. Au Conseil des droits de l’homme de l’ONU mardi, la presque totalité des diplomates a quitté la salle lorsque le ministre des Affaires étrangères russe a commencé son allocution. Des manifestations en appui aux Ukrainiens sont organisées partout dans le monde, et la colère face à l’invasion de l’armée russe semble tout aussi forte même au Canada. Un sondage de la firme Maru publié cette semaine montre que 91 % des Canadiens sont en « opposition totale avec la tyrannie de la Russie de Vladimir Poutine ». J’aurais du mal à nommer une autre situation de guerre où l’opinion publique mondiale s’est montrée aussi campée, aussi rapidement, contre une agression armée. Il semble plus simple de décrire l’horreur d’une bombe qui tombe sur des civils innocents lorsque cette bombe n’est pas, par exemple, américaine.

Ensuite, la vague de solidarité pro-ukrainienne ne semble pas, du moins pour le moment, se traduire en tsunami de haine envers le peuple russe ou les personnes d’origine russe. Plusieurs leaders importants ont donné rapidement le ton, à commencer par le président ukrainien lui-même, Volodymyr Zelensky, suivi par la vice-première ministre du Canada, Chrystia Freeland, aussi d’origine ukrainienne. Tous deux ont lancé des messages au cours des derniers jours pour marteler que le conflit en cours n’est pas avec le peuple russe, mais avec le président Vladimir Poutine et son entourage. On relaie également des images de manifestations antiguerre dans les grandes villes de Russie — des rassemblements qui seraient certainement encore plus importants si ce n’était de la violence de la répression policière dans ce pays. À la télévision, on semble éviter d’utiliser des formulations comme « les Russes » pour désigner des responsables de l’agression militaire, préférant parler de Vladimir Poutine lui-même ou de son régime.

Cette conscience du poids des mots et du risque de dérapage est rafraîchissante. On sait que les débuts de la pandémie dans la région de Wuhan et que les relations diplomatiques pour le moins tendues avec la Chine ont donné lieu à toutes sortes de commentaires sur « les Chinois » et à une montée des crimes haineux envers les personnes d’origine asiatique.

On sait aussi qu’un nombre déplorable de nos concitoyens n’hésitent pas à dériver d’une critique du régime saoudien ou d’un groupe comme Daech vers des généralisations sur « les Arabes » ou sur « les musulmans ». Pas plus tard que l’été dernier, des imbéciles ont aussi commis une série d’actes antisémites dans l’arrondissement de Saint-Laurent, comme s’il s’agissait là d’une manière de critiquer l’État d’Israël. Et on se rappelle que, durant la Seconde Guerre mondiale, le Canada a notamment cru bon d’interner ses propres citoyens d’origine japonaise.

Puisque la liste de tristes précédents est longue, le souci actuel des mots détonne. Je ne vois personne de sérieux lancer l’hypothèse que l’autoritarisme de Poutine trouverait ses sources dans une tare particulière de la religion orthodoxe ou que la culture russe prendrait ses racines dans un éloge unique de la violence. L’analyse porte surtout sur les enjeux politiques, économiques et humanitaires. Enfin, croisons les doigts pour que ça dure.

Finalement, des réfugiés ne se sont pas présentés comme des menaces à refouler aux frontières. Le président de la Bulgarie, Roumen Radev, a peut-être eu la déclaration la plus candide à ce sujet. « Ce sont des Européens », a-t-il lancé plus tôt cette semaine. « Ces personnes sont intelligentes, éduquées… Ce ne sont pas les vagues de réfugiés auxquelles nous sommes habitués, des gens à l’identité incertaine, aux passés incertains, qui auraient même pu être des terroristes. » Des commentateurs, des experts et des journalistes ont aussi parlé de leur choc devant la guerre touchant le monde « civilisé » — omettant de transmettre du même coup une liste des régions du monde « barbares ». Cette nouvelle ouverture aux victimes de la guerre semble donc venir de l’identité des Ukrainiens : on leur ouvre les portes au nom de leur européanité et non de leur humanité. Le mauvais traitement réservé aux Africains et aux Asiatiques résidant en Ukraine à la frontière polonaise, dénoncé mardi par le Haut-Commissariat aux réfugiés de l’ONU, vient d’ailleurs démonter cette nuance importante.

L’humanisation particulière du peuple ukrainien joue un rôle positif très important dans le sort de cette population. Il y a la guerre, les blessés, la mort, les familles déchirées. Il y aura encore peut-être la faim, le manque d’eau et de ressources, et on ne sait quoi encore. Aucun individu ne devrait avoir à endurer ces horreurs, déjà. Il est encore plus abject d’avoir à affronter en plus, au milieu de ces tourments, l’indifférence du monde, ou son hostilité. Pour le moment, le respect de la dignité de la population ukrainienne semble être une préoccupation centrale d’une grande partie de la planète. Espérons que ça durera et que d’autres victimes des guerres contemporaines pourront bientôt en bénéficier.

Je ne veux pas ici faire un portrait jovialiste de la couverture de la guerre en Ukraine. L’actualité des dernières semaines est très difficile, ses implications sont historiques, et les défis qu’elle implique sont nombreux. Cela dit, j’ai rarement vu un souci d’humanisation aussi généralisé des parties prenantes d’un conflit, et je crois qu’il est important de le souligner. Plusieurs semblent regarder ce qui se passe dans l’est de l’Europe en se disant : « Ces gens sont comme moi, ça pourrait être moi. » La vérité, c’est que chaque être humain est en bonne partie comme soi, et qu’il offre un miroir de soi. C’est une chose de le dire, et une autre de transformer son regard sur les nouvelles internationales à partir de ce principe.

Source: Le choix des mots

Mood shifts in Polish border town as alt-right supporters go after dark-skinned refugees from Ukraine

Sigh….:

The Przemyśl train station is a spot that’s come to be known in the last six days for its heartwarming scenes of volunteers welcoming tired and hungry refugees with a cup of hot tea and a smile. On a grey Wednesday morning, however, under a brooding, overcast sky, tension is building on the ground.

Yellow-vested volunteers, who days before held their positions alone outside, are now crowded out by a heavy police presence. Officers in green and blue uniforms pace through the parking lot of the square, and tall guards frame the entryway to the platforms, scanning everyone who makes their way in and out of the building.

“It’s really scary now,” says Soufiane, an Algerian volunteer who’s been offering translation services in Arabic, French, English and Polish. The change, he explains, was the immediate result of the actions carried out the night before by a group of alt-right supporters targeting refugees who fled the Russian invasion.

Tuesday evening, a Polish outlet shared video footage of a dozen black-hooded men descending on the train station. Their targets, explained the reporter who was quick enough to pull out her phone when she saw the men rushing the station, were the arriving refugees. But, she adds, only the ones who “looked like they weren’t Ukrainian.”

“They began shouting at the group of three Indian men, ‘go back to the railway station, go back to your country,’ ” says Anna Mikulska, a reporter with oko.agency.

Among hundreds of thousands of refugees from Ukraine arriving in Poland are Africans, Indians and others lacking Ukrainian passports. Some reported racist treatment by officials on the Ukrainian side.

Around the same time that night and a bit further down the road, a similar scene, albeit more contained, began playing out in the parking lot of the relief centre in the town of Medyka. There, we saw a similar group of balaclava-clad men prowling the aisles where volunteers were offering free food and clothing while a determined line of police followed closely behind.

While there were no reports of anything serious happening at Medyka, the same cannot be said for Przemyśl.

“We were just going to our car … when we were stopped by some people,” starts one of the three German men in the video captured by OKO. “They slapped us and tried to hit us.”

The group of Germans came to Poland with the NGO Humanity First to assist with volunteer efforts. The attacking football hooligans — as they’re called locally here — appeared to mark them because of their skin colour.

“We’re just trying to find another way to get to our car,” says the German man, timidly.

Football hooligans, Przemysław Witkowski tells me the morning after the incident, are called that because they’re all fans of specific teams. “But they all share similar affiliations of nationalist and anti-refugee sentiment,” says the academic, who specializes in studying the far right in Poland.

“These people represent a small minority of the Polish people,” he underscored. “But they’re still out there.”

Groups like these organize primarily on platforms like Facebook groups to communicate. In recent days, they have begun using the social media tool to co-ordinate street patrols.

“Two beige on beige walking down the street,” reads one of the posts uncovered by a freelance Polish journalist who specializes in tracking the movements of these groups.

This kind of sentiment isn’t new, Witkowski explains. Even before the Russian invasion of Ukraine prompted masses of people to arrive on Poland’s doorstep, these groups were rife with anti-refugee sentiment.

The recent violence can be traced back to a series of social media posts that began making the rounds in the last few days. The tweets and Facebook posts falsely allege that women and children are being targeted by those who had recently arrived from the Przemyśl train station.

“They then see it as a call to arms, to protect their Polish women,” says Mikulska, the reporter. The pressure from these posts eventually prompted the local police to issue a tweet to dispel the rumours.

The tweet says there is “false information in social media that there have been serious criminal offenses in Przemyśl and border counties: burglaries, assaults and rape. It’s not true. The police did not record an increased number of crimes in connection with the situation at the border.”

Some are attributing this flurry of fake news accounts to a Russia-fuelled disinformation effort. Witkowski agrees that, while he can’t confirm these specific stories were plants, that kind of strategy has been used in the past by the Kremlin and would be advantageous to them now.

“Presenting Poland as racist and aggressive towards other countries is exactly the kind of soft power that Russia could wield to destabilize the country’s standing on the global stage,” he said.

Indeed, later that day, Witkowski sends along the latest figures from the Polish Institute for Internet and Social Media Research, which found more than 120,000 attempts at disinformation in Poland under the hashtags #Ukraine, #Russia and #war in the last 24 hours. Much of the content related to fuelling anti-refugee hysteria.

The trains are still arriving in Przemyśl — 47,000 people in the last 24 hours, Soufiane tells me — but the feeling on the ground has certainly shifted. Blanket-huddled figures are now being quickly shuffled onto buses to their next destination and volunteers are encouraging people to move onto bigger cities like Warsaw and Krakow instead of lingering.

“I’m afraid today because I’m thinking: what if they think I’m a refugee?” Sanoufie tells me as we jockey between two officers in their own blue balaclavas. He’s been living in Poland for seven years, and this is the first time such thoughts have entered his mind.

“I took the bus home last night. Walking just didn’t feel safe.”

Source: Mood shifts in Polish border town as alt-right supporters go after dark-skinned refugees from Ukraine

Wagner: Work permit change urged for Afghans now needed for Ukrainians to come to Canada

More pressures:

Many thousands are leaving Ukraine with heartbreaking separations from spouses, parents and homes. Meanwhile, in Canada, a single change to work permits can support people in far larger numbers to come here after being forced from their homes. That change is waiving a rule that requires someone to prove they can leave Canada again.

All applicants to temporary visas must demonstrate their ability and willingness to leave Canada by showing they have somewhere else to go, even if they already applied for permanent residence, or intend to.

This is an old rule that predates Canada’s goal of retaining its international workforce, once they arrive, through permanent residence programs. If it’s arcane for others, it’s absurd and prohibitive for those in refugee circumstances.

Among the Afghans who left as the Taliban took power in August were lawyers, cooks, electricians, and software developers — skills needed across Canada — yet so many are in a humanitarian queue instead of here on work permits. The same barrier faces Ukrainians.

In effect, Canada’s largest immigration option is closed as soon as someone needs it most. In 2019, before the pandemic, Canada welcomed over 404,000 people on work permits, many of whom go on to become permanent residents. For comparison, the refugee resettlement target the same year was 46,450.

blob:https://multiculturalmeanderings.wordpress.com/27e4c896-162d-472c-8c0f-cf96eb3fe425

Only recently has the idea of using skilled immigration as an additional option to refugee resettlement gained traction globally and in Canada. Canada first launched the Economic Mobility Pathways Pilot in 2018 as a test to help people in refugee circumstances, who got job offers in Canada, to work through barriers, such as needing a valid passport and police certificates, which are impossible for many in displacement to get.

The test cases were a runaway success. But for all the pilot’s innovation, its main drawback is significant. The flexibility introduced, like accepting expired passports, only applies to permanent residence pathways and not to work permits and the barriers that come with them.

This disadvantages displaced talent for two main reasons: A lack of speed and space. Skilled immigration largely relies on a job offer and most employers can’t hire someone on a permanent residence timeline, which is eight months or longer. And only a portion of skilled immigration space is left open when work permits are off the table.

We analyzed 66 permanent residence pathways and found just 15 are free of a requirement for in-Canada work experience or points systems that reward it. In other words, 77 per cent of these pathways are either inaccessible by or disadvantageous to displaced applicants who can‘t access work permits.

Many people displaced by conflict have in-demand skills and, despite the timeline, incredible Canadian teams are already hiring and relocating them. More companies want to. We need to unlock these opportunities.

Work permits promise speed and scale. By waiving a single requirement and extending the flexibility now in place for displaced applicants under an innovative pilot, Canada can open a major route to safety and opportunity for Ukrainians, Afghans and others before them.

Dana Wagner is co-founder and managing director of TalentLift, a non-profit talent agency.

Source: Work permit change urged for Afghans now needed for Ukrainians to come to Canada

Europe’s different approach to Ukrainian and Syrian refugees draws accusations of racism

Of note. But important to distinguish whether the intent was more factual, e.g., “refugee wave we have been used to,” unfortunate contrasts “these people are intelligent” implying others are not, and more right wing deliberate anti-immigrant language.

That being said, the situation of many non-Ukrainians fleeing the invasion, is extremely disturbing:

They file into neighbouring countries by the hundreds of thousands — refugees from Ukraine clutching children in one arm, belongings in the other. And they’re being heartily welcomed, by leaders of countries such as Poland, Hungary, Slovakia, Bulgaria, Moldova and Romania.

But while the hospitality has been applauded, it has also highlighted stark differences in treatment given to migrants and refugees from the Middle East and Africa, particularly Syrians who came in 2015. Some among them say the language they are hearing from leaders now welcoming refugees has been disturbing and hurtful.

“These are not the refugees we are used to; these people are Europeans,” Bulgarian Prime Minister Kiril Petkov told journalists earlier this week. “These people are intelligent. They are educated people…. This is not the refugee wave we have been used to, people we were not sure about their identity, people with unclear pasts, who could have been even terrorists.

“In other words, there is not a single European country now which is afraid of the current wave of refugees.”

‘Racism and Islamophobia’

Syrian journalist Okba Mohammad says that statement “mixes racism and Islamophobia.”

Mohammad fled his hometown of Daraa in 2018. He now lives in Spain and with other Syrian refugees founded a bilingual magazine in Arabic and Spanish. He described a sense of déjà vu as he followed events in Ukraine.

He also had sheltered underground to protect himself from Russian bombs. He also struggled to board an overcrowded bus to flee his town. He also was separated from his family at the border.

“A refugee is a refugee, whether European, African or Asian,” Mohammad said.

The change in tone of some of Europe’s leaders who in the past have expressed among the most extreme anti-migration views in the bloc has been striking. They have shifted from “We aren’t going to let anyone in” to “We’re letting everyone in.”

Those comments were made only three months apart by Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban. The first quote is from statements he made in December when he was addressing migrants and refugees from the Middle East and Africa. The second from comments made this week addressing people from Ukraine.

Some journalists, too, are being criticized for descriptions of Ukrainian refugees.

“These are prosperous, middle-class people,” an Al Jazeera English television presenter said. “These are not obviously refugees trying to get away from areas in the Middle East … in North Africa. They look like any European family that you would live next door to.”

The channel issued an apology saying the comments were insensitive and irresponsible.

CBS news apologized after one of its correspondents said the conflict in Kyiv wasn’t “like Iraq or Afghanistan that has seen conflict raging for decades. This is a relatively civilized, relatively European” city.

Reports of Nigerians, Indians and Lebanese stuck at borders

As more and more people scrambled to flee Ukraine, several reports emerged of residents, including Nigerians, Indians and Lebanese, getting stuck at borders. Unlike Ukrainians, many non-Europeans need visas to get into neighbouring countries. Embassies around the world were scrambling to assist their citizens in getting through.

Videos shared on social media under the hashtag #AfricansinUkraine allegedly showed African students being kept from boarding trains out of Ukraine to make space for Ukrainians.

The African Union in Nairobi said Monday that everyone has the right to cross international borders to flee conflict. The continental body said “reports that Africans are singled out for unacceptable dissimilar treatment would be shockingly racist and in breach of international law.”

It urged all countries to “show the same empathy and support to all people fleeing war notwithstanding their racial identity.”

Polish UN Ambassador Krzysztof Szczerski said at the General Assembly on Monday that assertions of race- or religion-based discrimination at Poland’s border are “a complete lie and a terrible insult to us.”

“The nationals of all countries who suffered from Russian aggression or whose life is at risk can seek shelter in my country,” he said.

Szczerski said people of some 125 nationalities had been admitted to Poland on Monday morning from Ukraine, including Ukrainian, Uzbek, Nigerian, Indian, Moroccan, Pakistani, Afghan, Belarusian, Algerian and more. Overall, he said, 300,000 people have arrived during the crisis.

Hostility toward Syrian refugees in Europe

When over a million people crossed into Europe in 2015, support for refugees fleeing wars in Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan was relatively high at first. There were also moments of hostility — such as when a Hungarian camerawoman was filmed kicking and possibly tripping migrants along the country’s border with Serbia.

Still, back then, Germany’s then chancellor, Angela Merkel, famously said “Wir schaffen das” (“We can do it”), and the Swedish prime minister urged citizens to “open your hearts” to refugees.

Volunteers gathered on Greek beaches to rescue exhausted families crossing on boats from Turkey. In Germany, they were greeted with applause at train and bus stations.

But the warm welcome soon ended after EU nations disagreed over how to share responsibility, with the main pushback coming from Central European countries such as Hungary and Poland. One by one, governments across Europe toughened migration and asylum policies, earning the nickname “Fortress Europe.”

Just last week, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees denounced the increasing “violence and serious human rights violations” across European borders, specifically pointing the finger at Greece.

Last year, hundreds of people, mainly from Iraq and Syria but also from Africa, were left stranded in a no man’s land between Poland and Belarus as the EU accused Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko of luring thousands of foreigners to his country’s borders in retaliation for sanctions. At the time, Poland blocked access to aid groups and journalists. More than 15 people died in the cold.

‘Deeply embedded racism’

Meanwhile, in the Mediterranean, the European Union has been criticized for paying Libya to intercept migrants trying to reach its shores, helping to return them to abusive and often deadly detention centres.

“There is no way to avoid questions around the deeply embedded racism of European migration policies when we see how different the reactions of national governments and EU elites are to the people trying to reach Europe,” Lena Karamanidou, an independent migration and asylum researcher in Greece, wrote on Twitter.

Jeff Crisp, a former head of policy, development and evaluation at UNHCR, agreed that race and religion influenced treatment of refugees.

“Countries that had been really negative on the refugee issue and have made it very difficult for the EU to develop coherent refugee policy over the last decade, suddenly come forward with a much more positive response,” Crisp said.

Much of Orban’s opposition to migration is based on his belief that to “preserve cultural homogeneity and ethnic homogeneity,” Hungary should not accept refugees from different cultures and different religions.

Members of Poland’s conservative nationalist ruling party have echoed Orban’s thinking, saying they want to protect Poland’s identity as a Christian nation and guarantee its security.

These arguments have not been applied to their Ukrainian neighbours, with whom they share historical and cultural ties. Parts of Ukraine today were once also parts of Poland and Hungary. Over one million Ukrainians live and work in Poland and hundreds of thousands more are scattered across Europe. Some 150,000 ethnic Hungarians also live in Western Ukraine, many of whom have Hungarian passports.

“It is not completely unnatural for people to feel more comfortable with people who come from nearby, who speak the [similar] language or have a [similar] culture,” Crisp said.

In Poland, Ruchir Kataria, an Indian volunteer, told The Associated Press on Sunday that his compatriots got stuck on the Ukrainian side of the border crossing into Medyka, Poland. In Ukraine, they were initially told to go to Romania, hundreds of kilometres away, he said, after they had already made long journeys on foot to the border, not eating for three days. Finally, on Monday they got through.

Source: Europe’s different approach to Ukrainian and Syrian refugees draws accusations of racism

Québec loin de sa cible pour les réfugiés afghans

Of note (and not blaming the feds):

Six mois après la crise en Afghanistan, Québec peine à accueillir les 300 réfugiés afghans qu’il s’était engagé à recevoir, a constaté Le Devoir. Selon des chiffres fournis par le ministère de l’Immigration, de la Francisation et de l’Intégration (MIFI), à peine 89 d’entre eux se sont installés au Québec dans le cadre du Programme spécial pour les Afghans qui ont aidé le gouvernement du Canada au mois d’août dernier, alors qu’ils sont plusieurs milliers dans le reste du pays.

En comparant cette opération humanitaire à celle menée pour les Syriens en 2015-2016, où plus de 5000 réfugiés syriens avaient été accueillis par le Québec, force est d’admettre qu’elle n’a pas la même ampleur, admet Stephan Reichhold, directeur de la Table de concertation des organismes au service des personnes réfugiées et immigrantes (TCRI). « C’est quand même assez décevant. En août et septembre dernier, on pensait qu’on recevrait des milliers d’Afghans, la Ville de Montréal était hypermobilisée, et finalement très peu d’Afghans sont arrivés au Québec, dit-il. Au moins, [le gouvernement] aura essayé. »

Pour toute l’année 2021, hormis les 89 venus au Québec grâce au programme spécial du fédéral, 232 Afghans ont été admis comme réfugiés dans la province, à la suite de l’aboutissement de demandes de parrainages privés déposées au cours des années précédentes. La cible du gouvernement Legault pour 2021 est de 7500 réfugiés, toutes origines confondues.

Quant au gouvernement canadien, il disait la semaine dernière qu’il travaillait « d’arrache-pied » pour atteindre sa cible de 40 000 réfugiés afghans. Or, jusqu’ici, 7885 Afghans sont arrivés, soit 4600 dans le cadre du Programme spécial pour les Afghans ayant aidé le gouvernement et 3285 grâce à un autre programme humanitaire canadien destiné aux plus vulnérables (femmes leaders, personnes LGBTI, etc.).

Rétention difficile

Selon le MIFI, les réfugiés afghans venus au Québec dans le cadre du programme de réinstallation fédéral se sont surtout installés à Montréal, Longueuil et Brossard. Malgré le fait que Sherbrooke abrite la deuxième communauté afghane en importance, à peine 11 personnes, venues grâce au programme fédéral, y ont élu domicile, mais 52 réfugiés, entrés par la « voie régulière » que constituent les parrainages, s’y sont aussi installés. Alors que les premières familles arrivaient en septembre dernier, la directrice du Service d’aide aux néo-Canadiens (SANC) de l’époque, Mercedes Orellana, reconnaissait déjà qu’un nombre moins important que prévu allait s’installer en Estrie et au Québec en général.

À l’époque, une intervenante et interprète afghane du SANC s’était rendue à Toronto à la demande du MIFI pour tenter de convaincre les nouveaux arrivants de venir s’installer au Québec. Selon Mme Orellana, il était important de vérifier si la famille avait des attaches ou un intérêt particulier à venir s’installer dans une province comme le Québec qui a ses particularités, notamment la langue française. « C’est bien de vérifier, car ça va être un facteur de rétention pour plus tard », avait-elle indiqué. À l’étranger, le Canada est plus connu que le Québec.

Le MIFI explique aussi le déficit d’attraction du Québec par la popularité de grandes villes canadiennes. « Le Québec était prêt à accueillir plus de familles, cependant, il semble qu’une part importante des personnes réfugiées afghanes arrivées à ce jour ont préféré demeurer dans la grande région de Toronto, où des membres de leurs familles ou des proches étaient déjà installés », a déclaré Émilie Vézina, porte-parole du MIFI.

Un « manque d’ambition »

Le député de Québec solidaire et porte-parole en matière d’immigration, Andrés Fontecilla, estime que la cible d’accueil fixée était trop faible et ne reflétait pas les besoins. « Trois cents personnes nous apparaissaient très peu. À 4personnes par famille, ce n’est même pas 80 familles », a-t-il dit au Devoir. Il rappelle que, l’été dernier, accueillir les Afghans au Canada était une « urgence ». « On disait qu’on allait faire immigrer le plus grand nombre possible [d’Afghans]. Le résultat est vraiment décevant. »

Le député libéral Saul Polo déplore lui aussi le « manque d’ambition » du gouvernement du Québec. « Pour avoir été en contact avec un grand nombre de personnes afghanes, à Laval, mais aussi dans d’autres villes comme Sherbrooke, je peux dire qu’elles sont déçues et frustrées du manque d’ambition du gouvernement face à la situation afghane. Il semble que le gouvernement ne tient pas compte du fait que la communauté est prête à se mobiliser pour les accueillir et les intégrer. »

C’est ce qu’aimeraient justement faire Nancy Green-Grégoire et Clothilde Parent-Chartier, toutes deux membres de Tri-Parish + Friends for Refugees, un groupe de parrainage collectif (parrainage privé). Dans une lettre ouverte publiée en septembre dernier, elles demandaient que le parrainage collectif puisse être mis à contribution pour les Afghans, ce que les plafonds imposés ne permettaient pas. « Il y a des [gens] ici qui étaient prêts à parrainer et qui voulaient réagir rapidement, comme lors de la crise syrienne, mais ce n’était pas possible », rappelle Mme Parent-Chartier, en disant voir le parrainage collectif comme étant complémentaire au parrainage de l’État.

En 2020, le groupe a notamment parrainé une famille d’Afghans, réfugiée au Pakistan, qui n’est pas encore arrivée. Il a aussi déposé, le mois dernier, trois autres dossiers d’Afghans membres d’une même famille ayant fui au Pakistan, qui n’ont pas encore réussi à obtenir un statut officiel de réfugiés. « On ne sait pas s’ils vont répondre aux critères [du MIFI]. Vont-ils pouvoir bénéficier d’un traitement particulier alors que c’est très difficile pour eux d’obtenir une preuve du Haut-commissariat aux réfugiés ? » s’inquiète Mme Parent-Chartier.

Source: Québec loin de sa cible pour les réfugiés afghans

Refugees in Quebec will have to learn French within 6 months

Not realistic and discriminatory (but not surprising), unfortunately):

The Quebec government is moving ahead with a controversial part of its proposed language bill, which will require all government officials to communicate with new immigrants exclusively in French, six months after their arrival — with no exceptions for refugees and asylum seekers.

The article of Bill 96, which was introduced at the National Assembly last May, was recently approved by the legislative committee studying the bill, amid criticism from opposition Liberal and Québec Solidaire MNAs. The bill is expected to become law this spring but still faces detailed study in committee.

Some organizations, opposition members and even the union representing public servants tried to persuade the government to soften the rule, to no avail.

“For newly arriving immigrants, the basic principle of the law is clear: as of Day 1, it’s exclusively in French,” said Simon Jolin-Barrette, justice minister and minister responsible for the French language.

There are exemptions in the law, which allow communication in a language other than French, “where health, public safety or the principles of natural justice so require” such as getting health care.

As well, the bill allows for a six-month grace period for “particular situations that require the use of a language other than French with new immigrants” according to Élisabeth Gosselin, spokesperson for Jolin-Barrette.

The bill says after that six-month period has lapsed, communication must be in French.

“Currently, the government communicates with immigrants who have requested it, sometimes for years, or for their whole lifetime, in a language other than French, which does not foster integration,” Gosselin said.

Learning French in 6 months

Community organizations working with newly arrived immigrants have been calling on the government to extend the six-month grace period.

“We all agree that the government cannot respond to immigrants in every language. But we have to give them time to learn French,” said Élodie Combes, member of the Table de concertation des organismes au service des personnes réfugiées et immigrantes (TCRI), a working group that represents community organizations working with immigrants.

Combes believes that the bill may actually hinder the integration of immigrants, by making it more difficult for them to get government services.

“It’s as if we’re telling them to retreat into their lingustic minority, that the government is not there for them, because they aren’t francophone enough,” she said.

Garine Papazian-Zohrabian, an associate professor in educational psychology at the Université de Montréal who researches French-language training for immigrants, says the six-month hard cap will be most harmful for refugees and asylum seekers, who are arriving in a vulnerable state.

“Members of this population are already disoriented, arriving in Quebec. They can been burdened by a difficult past and face cultural challenges. They’re not ready to learn a new language, like French, right after their arrival,” said Papazian-Zohrabian.

“You might as well say that we don’t accept refugees or immigrants, rather than place so many obstacles in front of them,” she added.

Opposition slams ‘excessive’ measures in bill

The union representing 40,000 Quebec civil servants, the Syndicat de la fonction publique et parapublique du Québec (SFPQ), is also in favour of extending the six-month grace period.

In its submission to the committee examining the bill, the union suggested the delay could be extended to two years, to allow new immigrants more time to adapt.

Ruba Ghazal, Québec Solidaire MNA for the Mercier riding in Montreal, proposed a grace period of three years, saying that Jolin-Barrette is “totally disconnected from the reality of newly arrived immigrants.”

“The minister makes no distinction between a refugee and an economic class immigrant,” she said. “These people need more kindness and understanding.”

Jolin-Barrette dismissed the idea of extending the grace period, saying six months was a “reasonable” period.

Ghazal said while the bill takes a harsh stand with newly arrived immigrants, it contains a clause that allows the government to continue to communicate in languages other than French with people who immigrated to Quebec in the past.

Source: Refugees in Quebec will have to learn French within 6 months

Germans less skeptical of immigration

Significant shift with respect to skilled immigrants, concerns re refugees (similar pattern in Canada):

Christian Osterhaus knows only too well what the term Willkommenskultur (“welcome culture”) means: When hundreds of thousands of people seeking protection arrived in Germany in 2015, he was one of the first to co-found a local refugee aid organization.

“We didn’t want to repeat the mistakes of the past,” he tells DW. By welcoming the refugees, he and his team wanted to show “that we don’t exclude people again.” With around 30 fellow campaigners, Osterhaus got involved in Bonn in the fall of 2015. The group cared for 40 to 50 refugees, most of whom came from Syria.

Osterhaus was one of hundreds of thousands of people in Germany who set out to help those fleeing civil war in Syria and other countries, and to help integrate them into German society. “We wanted to give these people a new home,” Osterhaus says looking back.

The special effort at integration became known as Germany’s welcome culture. But in 2015 and 2016, many people also had little understanding for this attitude. They did not want to take in refugees and migrants. The xenophobic protest movement gave rise to the far-right populist Alternative for Germany party (AfD).

More people see benefits of migration

In its representative study “Willkommenskultur zwischen Stabilität und Aufbruch,” (Welcome Culture Between Stability and Departure) the nonprofit Bertelsmann Foundation has now taken a closer look at changes in Germans’ attitudes and identified a trend: Germans are more optimistic about migration and immigration than they were a few years ago.

“In essence, our survey shows that skepticism toward immigration is still widespread in Germany, but it has continually declined in recent years,” says Ulrike Wieland, co-author of the study: “More people now see the potential benefits of migration; especially for the economy. When it comes to perceptions of integration, we find that more respondents than in previous years see inequality of opportunity and discrimination as significant obstacles hampering integration of individuals.”

The Bertelsmann Foundation has been conducting representative surveys since 2012. In the beginning, the researchers set out to determine how Germans felt about the immigration of skilled workers. But in response to the influx of large numbers of refugees in 2015-2016, researchers wanted to gauge attitudes towards these people.

As to long-term effects of immigration, positive and negative assessments roughly balance each other out. But the debate on refugees has somewhat tipped the scales.

Today, many see immigration as a way to help solve Germany’s demographic and economic problems. For example, two out of three respondents see immigration as helping to balance out an aging society, more than half of those polled said it could also compensate for the ongoing shortage of skilled workers, and half of all respondents expect immigrants to generate additional revenue for Germany’s pension fund.

But many respondents remain skeptical: 67% say that immigrants place an additional burden on the welfare state, 66% say they worry about conflicts erupting between people born and raised in Germany and immigrants, and many respondents fear that schools are facing major problems integrating immigrant students.

But there is an important differentiation to make: skilled immigrants seeking employment or academic opportunities are more accepted (71%) than refugees who are primarily seeking protection (59 %).

More than a third don’t want more refugees

The Bertelsmann Foundation study also clearly shows that there is still a lot of skepticism in Germany when it comes to refugees.

Christian Osterhaus notes that many helpers have turned away because of the decrease in acceptance for their work for refugees. “In the beginning we were part of a social movement and felt supported, but for several years we have been working against the social mainstream,” is how Osterhaus describes it to DW.

Germans have overall become more accepting of refugees. But over one-third of respondents (36%) believe that Germany cannot take in any more of them. In 2017, that number stood at 54%. Currently, 20% consider the refugees to be “temporary guests” who do not need to be integrated into society.

“We see that one-fifth of the population is skeptical of refugees or outright rejects them. These people seem to have a worldview that supports the idea of a (far-reaching) social closure against migration,” explains co-author Ulrike Wieland.

Germany should see itself as an immigration society,’ says the study’s co-author, Ulrike Wieland

People with an immigrant background are underrepresented in politics, corporate management and the media in Germany. Respondents see German language skills as a pivotal prerequisite to integration. But many of them also believe that legislation needs to be changed to combat existing inequality when it comes to finding housing, dealing with authorities or schools.

The new coalition government of center-left Social Democrats (SPD), environmentalist Greens and neoliberal Free Democrats (FDP) has already made clear it wants to focus more on integration. For example, they are planning to ensure that even rejected asylum seekers are given the opportunity to stay in Germany permanently if they have learned German and have found work to earn a sufficient income. Family reunification is to be extended to all refugees and it is to become easier to obtain German nationality.

That is basically the right way to go, says researcher Ulrike Wieland: “But it is also important for Germany to develop a positive self-image as an immigration society. To achieve this, politicians and civil society must work together. They must actively shape a diverse society.”

Aid worker Christian Osterhaus looks back at when he started working with refugees: “At the time, I really had the impression that German society had opened up and changed and had actually learned a lot.” He believes that interpersonal connections and friendships are the foundation for the path to building a real welcome culture in Germany.

Source: Germans less skeptical of immigration

Falconer and Damian Smith: Asylum-seeker smuggling is a symptom, not a root cause

Good arguments in favour of a managed approach to asylum seekers (as Canada largely has with even Roxham Road given how the government processes claims). On the other hand, just as “cracking down” incentivises more crossings between official points of entry, so does having “unofficial” points of entry like Roxham Road, with the important and real difference that they are known and identified, and have to go through the official process.

So the hard part is ensuring a quick, efficient and fair efficient determination process that is subject to enforcement, without the endless appeal processes that undermine confidence among Canadians:

Earlier this month, the Patels – a family of four from India – died of cold exposure trying to walk south through the Canada-U.S. border, near Emerson, Man.

But rather than look at how policies incentivize such irregular migration and produce such tragedies, Canadian politicians and news media have been quick to parrot rhetoric from other rich countries, speculating about the responsibility of criminal smugglers and wider networks of nefarious actors. “It is so tragic to see a family perish like this, victims of human traffickers, misinformation and people who have taken advantage of their desire to build a better world,” Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said.

Just three months earlier, the U.K.’s Interior Minister blamed smugglers for the death of 31 peoplewhen a boat capsized in the English Channel, and vowed to pass laws to make it illegal to claim asylum. And the U.S., which for decades has forced irregular migrants to make deadly desert crossings, has criminalized humanitarian groups as smugglers.

But while the Florida man arrested in the Patels’ case allegedly sought to profit from their desperation, he did not cause it.

What the political rhetoric around irregular migration misses is that human smuggling is a symptom of the friction between the desire to migrate or find protection, and the absence of safe and legal pathways to do so. Prohibition in the face of high demand only fosters illicit markets, and “cracking down” on small-time criminals addresses symptoms, not the causes.

The number of U.S. green cards offered every year has been capped at 675,000 since 1991, resulting in an average wait time of 7.5 years for eligible immigrants. But it varies by country; for an Indian professional, wait times to enter the U.S. can reach up to 50 years. Roughly 14 per cent of potential applicants will die of old age before receiving a green card.

The U.S. has taken an even more restrictive approach to asylum. The Biden administration has continued a series of Trump era policies to expel asylum seekers without a hearing, or force them to remain in Mexico until it is heard. That led the backlog to surpass 1.6 million last December, pushing wait times to more than five years.

While Canadian immigration quotas are larger per capita – 421,000 for 2022 – the federal government has taken a similar approach to asylum. The majority of asylum seekers are recognized as refugees; they differ from resettled refugees, such as those from Afghanistan and Syria, only by the manner in which they arrived. Nevertheless, they are often unfairly assailed as “queue jumpers” or “bogus refugees,” or accused of “asylum shopping.” These accusations miss the entire point of why people migrate.

Since 2004, Canada and the U.S. have returned asylum seekers to each other under a Safe Third Country Agreement (STCA), which applies only to official ports of entry, leading to what is often called a “loophole” in the agreement. In fact, governmental discussions in 2001 recognized that sealing the border would mean more smuggling and a larger undocumented population.

Many asylum seekers have crossed between border points to avoid being returned to the U.S., where they would likely face imprisonment and deportation. The route the Patels were using developed precisely because the STCA incentivized irregular crossings.

In 2017, Canada established an informal humanitarian corridor at Roxham Road, but from March, 2020, to November 2021, it turned back almost every asylum seeker on public health grounds. Inland claims increased significantly. Most will be from people on visas, but many have been forced to bypass new restrictions through clandestine crossings.

Canada has stated that it is now in the process of “modernizing” the STCA. While details are murky, it will likely mean expanding measures to turn back asylum seekers. This is particularly troubling with the Supreme Court of Canada set to rule on the agreement’s constitutionality.

Because a reformed STCA would limit asylum access, rather than affect demand, there will only be more clandestine journeys, more organized smuggling and more dangerous modes of border crossings. Enforcing an expanded STCA will also require massive expenditures to surveil and police the border, resulting in more incarceration, a larger undocumented population, and corruption among border guards. Securitization is a self-fulfilling policy.

Canada is at a crossroads. It can choose hard line policies to the benefit of the Canadian security establishment and create more smugglers, even as its politicians heap blame on them when tragedy strikes. Or it can choose to manage the border by investing in a timelier, fairer asylum system and rethinking how it responds to demand for migration.

Robert Falconer is a research associate at the University of Calgary’s School of Public Policy. Craig Damian Smith is a senior research associate at the Canada Excellence Research Chair in Migration & Integration program at Ryerson University.

Source: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-asylum-seeker-smuggling-is-a-symptom-not-a-root-cause/

Sears: Canada is still admitting Afghan refugees at a glacial pace. Justin Trudeau must set a fire underneath our immigration officials

Overly harsh on IRCC staff and under-estimating the issues and processes involved but valid critique of the pace of bringing them to Canada in a more timely manner. Risks feeding the “over-promise, under-deliver” government narrative:

I suspect being a senior immigration official is only marginally less boring than being a night watchman, and that might sour their view of the world. Nonetheless, on three continents over several decades it has been my experience that those who control the visa stamps are all conditioned to find a way to say “No,” or “Later,” or “We’ll get back to you” — and then don’t. Ours are no different.

A young relative of mine was denied entry into Canada, after an especially obnoxious senior Canadian immigration official declared to her mother that they were not convinced that this was a “sincere adoption” — the staggering assumption being, I suppose, that the new mother would sell her beloved infant on arriving in Canada. Serious political pressure was required to reverse the insulting judgment. Plenty of Canadians have similarly awful stories to tell.

This is the reality that too many terrified Afghan refugees are facing today. The Taliban threaten their lives and their families constantly; Canadian NGOs desperately struggle to find paths out for them; and our senior immigration officials are unresponsive or unreachable. This too will require serious political pressure to fix, from the prime minister.

The parallel with Syria is quite plain. There, our immigration officials also tried their usual delaying devices until two very determined ministers, supported by PM Justin Trudeau, said, “Enough! Get this done.” Thousands of Syrians were quickly welcomed to Canada. Though the Syrians were fleeing a war zone, the risks the Afghans face are far more specific, urgent and life-threatening.

A favourite blocage used today is, of course, national security. As in “Yes Minister,” a Canadian Sir Humphrey might ooze, “Well, minister, that would be very courageous, questioning the advice of our national security advisers. Highly politically risky, but courageous, ma’am!” I was not aware that we have had a rash of terrorist attacks in the six years since thousands of Syrians built new lives for their families here.

We had little previous knowledge of many of the Syrians we admitted then. But many of the Afghans desperate to be rescued from tyranny now are men and women who put their lives at risk assisting Canadian soldiers, diplomats, journalists and NGOs. Hundreds of Canadians know these Afghan families personally.

It is especially embarrassing that we promised safe havens to 40,000 Afghans and have admitted fewer than 7,000. The United States, who have not outranked us in our welcome for immigrants and refugees for many, many years, have admitted over 10 times as many.

At this rate of foot-dragging — fewer than 50 refugees per day — we will be approaching the end of 2023 before we have kept our promise. By then, many of these desperate families will have been tortured and killed. Are we really willing to risk the humiliation and international opprobrium of having their blood on our hands?

Source: Canada is still admitting Afghan refugees at a glacial pace. Justin Trudeau must set a fire underneath our immigration officials